Class Reflection (8/9) EDU 6982

Monday, August 9                        Chapter Nine                        Educational Research

Vocabulary

1. Internal validity: (text pg. 220) control of extraneous variables.

Due to the fact that the plausible extraneous variables were controlled, the study had high internal validity.

2. Statistical regression: (text pg. 223) threat from change of extreme scores to those closer to the mean.

Due to statistical regression, the outliers scoring very high on the first test came back to the mean in the second test, thus the internal validity wasn’t as strong as the researchers hoped.

3. Diffusion of treatment: (text pg. 224) threat from treatment effect on one group affecting other groups.

The diffusion of treatment became obvious as the control group began getting resentful toward the group receiving the intervention.

4. Experimenter effects: (text pg. 224) threat from characteristics or expectations of the experimenter.

The age and gender of the experimenter seemed to have detrimental experimenter effects on the subjects.

5. External validity: (text pg. 225) generalizability of results.

The study proved to have strong external validity as it applied to most classrooms in the United States regardless of differences in characteristics.

6. Factorial designs: (text pg. 234) containing two or more independent variables.

By studying more than one independent variable and their interactions, the researchers employed the factorial design experiment.

7. Intervention fidelity: (text pg. 239) extent to which intervention occurred as intended.

When the subjects filled out the daily logs as the experiments wished, they knew they had strong intervention fidelity in their study.

Reflection

I consider myself a pretty strong visual learner. There are times that someone will begin reading a passage from a book to me and I simply ask to stop and read it myself. I can be auditory, but it is a lot more work for my brain to process and begin analyzing information (especially when something is read out loud). With this information in mind, one would think I would use more graphic representations in my classroom. Yet I don’t think I do it enough.

After today’s class in which each group had to visually present the threats to internal validity, I am determined to have my students complete more non-linguistic representations. Not only does it vary the class activities and provide a nice break, it creates meaning in the mind for many students. I know I went from a peripheral understanding of the threats to a very solid comprehension after the activity in class. I look forward to adapting these activities to my history classroom this year.

The Classroom Environment (EDU 6526)

This week in Survey of Instructional Strategies the online discussion centered around uniformity versus variety. How do we get students and parents invested when as teachers we teach to one style or to the masses? This may just be the millionaire dollar question. As classes grow in size and time shrinks quickly, the one on one time with students seems to go by the way side. Not to mention that in many public schools teaching to the test is necessary (or at least feels that way) since funding and Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) are at stake. Yet many feel that students get disengaged and disinterested quickly when this is the case.

I feel that because of these issues it is essential to create a classroom where personalities, emotions, and the variety of intelligences can find time to shine. This isn’t to say I do it perfectly or make every kid happy all the time, but I do work hard at making it a reality. In many ways the best way to tell if students feel comfortable enough to let their personalities be a part of the classroom environment is how much they are willing to risk. Obviously this refers to safe risk-taking behavior in a classroom where a student may ask a difficult question or feel ok with struggling to understand something in front of the class. It may be acting out a scene from a novel. It may be group work. It can be a lot of things, but I know my students are engaged when they feel that way. Yet I can’t let them get goofy; I must keep them engaged in content not just in the class. This is where the variety of strategies and tapping into different learning styles comes into play. Letting students work on a visual representation of a historical event or acting out a scene from history gets students interested in material beyond my “normal” assignments. The more I allow students to be themselves and feel safe doing it, while varying my assessments and instructional strategies, the more my classroom environment will feel comfortable to all.

Class Reflection (8/5) EDU 6982

Thursday, August 5

Vocabulary

No reading due today

Reflection

Today’s class provided a nice summary of validity and reliability for me, as well as an explanation of the different types of non-experimental research. While yesterday I felt a bit confused about validity, I know can boil it down to a simple statement: does the test or experiment do what it is supposed to do? This makes it much easier to remember what validity means.

When discussing non-experimental research, it became very clear that education could be the recipient of many of these studies. After brainstorming a list of topics that cannot be used in an experiment, it becomes pretty obvious that education sits right at the top of the list. Thus many of our studies in the educational field must be ex post facto or causal-correlational studies. Yet these have great value and I would argue could even be more valuable than experimental studies. In an experiment, it really is impossible for the researchers to prevent the subjects from knowing they are part of an experiment. Seems obvious right? Yet if we look back at demographics and achievement or teaching style or class size, we get information that is less contaminated in many ways. Thus I see great value in these types of non-experimental studies.

Class Reflection (8/4) EDU 6982

Wednesday, August 4                        Chapter Eight                        Educational Research

Vocabulary

1. Predictor variable: (text pg. 196) predicts the criterion variable.

Since high school GPA precedes college GPA, it is called the predictor variable.

2. Criterion variable: (text pg. 196) the predicted dependent variable.

College GPA would be the criterion variable when using high school GPA as a predictor for college success.

3. Multiple regression analysis: (text pg. 197) combines several predictor variables.

When trying to predict college success, researchers used multiple regression analysis be combining the predictor variables of SAT scores, high school GPA and extra curricular activities.

4. Logistic regression: (text pg. 197) combines several variables to predict a dichotomous outcome.

When a researcher uses pass/fail as the dependent variable combined with various predictor variables, they use logistic regression to explore the relationship.

5. Attenuation: (text pg. 200) lowering of correlation because of unreliable measures.

As the measures used in a study become unreliable, the correlation lowers and is called attenuation.

6. Causal-comparative: (text pg. 202) nonexperimental studies designed to determine cause and effect.

When the researchers cannot control the program or study, they use a causal-comparative design such as different ways the principals evaluate teachers.

7. Ex post facto: (text pg. 202) presumed cause that occurred in the past.

Sometimes researchers cannot have any involvement in a study, thus instead they look into the past to see if for instance class size impacts achievement.

Reflection

While we catch up to the reading in class, I find myself struggling a bit with reliability and validity. Maybe if I write it out here I can gain some more understanding. When I look at whether a instrument is reliable or not, I want to see if it has been used over and over in studies. Then I want to make sure that there are as few chances for errors as possible. When I am looking for validity, I want to make sure that variable chosen in valid for that study. Sometimes an independent variable can be valid for one dependent variable, but not for another. I think I still need some examples to fully understand this. Hopefully, I will get them in class Thursday.

Class Reflection (8/3) EDU 6982

Tuesday, August 3                        Chapters Six & Seven                        Educational Research

Vocabulary

1. Nominal scale: (text pg. 133) numbers assigned to categories.

The researchers used a nominal scale in assigning “1” to males and “2” to females.

2. Ordinal scale (text pg. 133) numbers rank ordered.

The participants in the study were lined up by height with the tallest person being 1^st and so on down the line.

3. Interval scale: (text pg. 134) equal intervals between numbers.

When John scores 90 and Hank scores 80 on an interval scale, we know they are the same difference as June who scores 20 and Jill who scores 30.

4. Ratio scale: (text pg. 134) numbers expressed as ratios.

When starting a scale based upon height, if you start at 0 it can be a ratio scale as there are equal intervals between inches.

5. Histogram: (text pg. 135) bar graph.

The researchers used a histogram to display the data in graph form.

6. Positively skewed: (text pg. 137) large numbers of low scores; few very high scores.

In a study of administrators’ salaries, the distribution would be positively skewed if most of the salaries were relatively low and a few were very high.

7. Standard deviation: (text pg. 139) average distance of the scores from the mean.

A standard deviation of 35 shows the reader that the scores in the study were very widespread across the board.

8. Correlation coefficient: (text pg. 142) number between -1 and +1 that indicates the direction and strength of the relationship.

When the correlation coefficient is closer to +1, the relationship between two variables being studied is strong.

9. Validity: (text pg. 144) the extent to which inferences are appropriate and meaningful.

A test for beginning teacher competency may be valid for how much those teachers know about classroom management.

10. Reliability: (text pg. 149) consistency of scores.

The more ambiguous questions are and the more tired the participants are when taking the test, the less reliable the instrument for that test proves to be.

11. Stability (test-retest reliability): (text p. 150) measured by giving the same instrument twice.

Researchers found high stability in their test of academic achievement by testing the group in June, intervening with a tutoring program, and retesting the group in December using the same instrument.

12. Equivalence: (text pg. 151) correlation of two forms of the same test.

Rather than giving the same test, researchers can find equivalence by administering gives alternate but equal tests to the same group.

13. Norm-referenced: (text. 160) interpretations that compare subjects with others.

A reference group, called the norm group, is the group that scores on the test are compared to when using a norm-referenced instrument.

14. Criterion-referenced: (text. 161) interpretations that compare subjects with a standard of performance.

The group being tested is compared to an established level of performance or skill when using a criterion-referenced instrument.

15. Semantic differential: (text pg. 169) a 7-point scale with adjective pairs as end points.

By placing adjectives on opposite ends of the scale as anchors, the researchers checked on attitudes of participants using a semantic differential.

Reflection

The last two chapters (six and seven) of the Educational Research text were full of information regarding using instruments in research and whether they are reliable and valid. While it seemed to be quite overwhelming (evidenced by my list of 15 vocab words!), I feel that I am getting the hang of it. Some of the information is easy to digest such as the different types of scales. I think this is due to the activities we performed in Educational Inquiry class. By getting up and visually showing the class what a nominal, ordinal and interval scale looked like using height, the information sticks in our brains a bit more. I find this helpful in my classroom as well and it was a good reminder to try this more often. It especially helps to use something so visual like height, when we see the difference between Andrew and David as compared to Molly and Janelle.

I also liked seeing the visual on the PowerPoint of positive and negative correlation. It helped to see a program where the graph can move and we can see the scatter points. This shows very clearly how scores from participants in a study can be very close together or quite far apart, and then the impact this has on correlation of variables. I feel that it also helped us to have to “act out” correlation. It triggers a more creative part of the brain and provides a snapshot memory of correlation for me. I can now think of no correlation as people randomly doing things in the room (no relationship or very little between two variables) and positive correlation as cartwheels and clapping.

Class Reflection (8/2) EDU 6982

Monday, August 2                        Chapters Three & Four                        Educational Research

Vocabulary

1. Meta-analysis: (text pg. 67) a quantitative review of previous studies.

Utilizing meta-analysis, Fred Folvary completed his study on genetics and obesity through examining a number of previous studies and analyzing the data himself.

2. Refereed: (text pg. 69) sent to reviewers for an evaluation.

The Journal of Internal Awesomeness is refereed because they utilize the most awesome people in reviewing studies sent to them.

3. Retrieval algorithms: (text pg. 92) determine both how many pages each search retrieves as well as how the results of each search are ordered.

When searing “Karate Kid” on Google, the retrieval algorithm produced the IMDB website first after going through all possible websites.

Reflection

The first day of the second week in Educational Inquiry felt jam-packed full of information and resources. While we spent the first full week discussing different aspects to research and research studies, Monday became a “hands-on” day. After meeting in the computer lab in the SPU library, we began searching ERIC and PsychINFO for articles pertaining to our hypotheses and research problem. While I felt confident in beginning my search, I appreciated the tips provided by Librarian Cindy Strong in finding full text articles. So often I run into abstracts of what I deem to be “perfect” articles. With Mrs. Strong’s help, I found a variety of ways to access full-text. Sounds simple and somewhat trivial, but in research it is essential.

I also found the chapter entitled “Introduction to the Internet” to be really useful in a different manner. As a high school history teacher, I teach my students how to research, especially for their National History Day paper in junior year. This massive, five month process in many ways typifies and identifies their junior year for them. Thus learning what is “good” research and what is “poor” research is very important. I liked the way the text explained the pros and cons of internet research and provided some valuable links to websites that can help. I plan on using this text as a guide for my teaching this year when it comes to research.

Cooperative Learning – Not Just for 1st Graders (EDU 6526)

Despite the fact that cooperative learning reminds some of kindergarten play time, in reality it proves to be one of the more influential and challenging instructional strategies that a teacher faces. No matter which age group a teacher uses cooperative learning experiences, there are challenges with socialization (both too much and too awkward). Yet in spite of these difficulties, the reward gained for student engagement and achievement wins out when deciding whether or not to use cooperative learning in a high school classroom.

Many of my lessons follow a format of me introducing a topic with some content followed by work individually that is followed up in cooperative learning groups of some kind. This often looks like pair work, but can many times be up to four members in a group. As the lecture states this week, there are many potential pitfalls to watch out for in using cooperative learning experiences. When the groups get too large (which I have done before), there are students who simply will not participate. Assigning tasks for each member can alleviate some of this, but it still makes it hard for a quiet kid to participate when there are even five or six members in a group. Additionally I find that my role in setting up the cooperative learning, as well as monitoring can greatly change the success or failure rate of a lesson. In other words, the more clear I am with my instructions, often times the better the work groups will produce. While this seems fairly obvious, I don’t think it can be overestimated. Secondly, the more I am physically present near groups by walking around the room and checking in, the better work they produce. Sometimes this comes about because they see me near them and they ask a question. Sometimes it is simply because they know they can’t screw around.

More often than not my cooperative learning involves the jigsaw. This works well in history as I can divide up a document or provide multiple primary sources for students to answer questions about or analyze. They then learn much more as a group by hearing from all members. As Dell’Olio and Donk state in Models of Teaching, “Rather than focusing on rote memorization of facts, her students are working as historians to construct the meaning of their documents contextually” (Dell’Olio, 270). Thus the jigsaw does not allow students to be passive. In order to truly participate, students are forced to use higher level thinking skills. Because of this and because of the social interaction it causes, I strongly support the jigsaw in high school history classrooms. Yet it is also very clear from my experience that I must have a very active role for the cooperative learning experience to be successful. This isn’t a time for passive teachers either.